In Defence of 28 Days Later

Rating: Null/10 (9 July 2003)

I agree with people who say this film is not really a Zombie movie. I definetley has more in common with films like The Omega Man than any of the Romero Zombie films. I think though, that a lot of people have been put off by the fact that it is a very non-Hollywood looking film. It was in parts gritty and grim, and in other parts beautifully shot, just like life, just unlike a lot of Hollywood films. We are not spoonfed information, instead we are asked to use our imaginations as to how the virus works, and how things have happened. All the best scary movies ask you to use your imagination. We only get glimpses of the 'scary enemies' as was the case in Jaws and Alien which achieved good tension, and unlike Alien Resurrection which did not. The heavy editing was only really used when involving the infected, which I though enhanced the sense of fury they had, and the editing in the 3rd and final part of the movie perfectly displayed a sense of panic and confusion.
This film has it's flaws and is not entirely original, however it is an effective high-tension thriller/horror and Jims walk around a deserted London is one of the best 5 minutes of cinema in a long time.